We're thrilled to announce that we've entered into an agreement with Atebits (aka Loren Brichter) to acquire Tweetie, a leading iPhone Twitter client. Tweetie will be renamed Twitter for iPhone and made free (currently $2.99) in the iTunes AppStore in the coming weeks.

Apple already has very wide latitude in deciding which apps will be approved for the store. If apps are low quality, they can be declined. And Apple can always issue more guidelines to application developers based on the content of the apps rather than on which tools were used to build them, requiring companies who create libraries to help produce iPhone applications to meet certain standards in terms of look, feel, and functionality in order to be included. Itâs not necessary to cut everyone off.

The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

Thursday's announcement immediately turned up evidence that Apple might be adding a flash to the iPhone's camera, thanks to functions named VCaptureDevice.hasFlash, AVCaptureDevice.flashMode, and AVCaptureDevice.hasTorch. Apple is allegedly investigating LED flash options, which would make such a feature very BlackBerry-like. Additionally, the latest iPhone SDK continues to contain hints about a front-facing camera as well as iChat support.

Apple's currentâand in our opinion, objectionableâposition is now close to the complete opposite of its initial stance. From promoting openness and standards, the company is now pushing for an ever more locked-down and restricted platform. It's bad for competition, it's bad for developers, and it's bad for consumers.

So the fact that it is Apple thatâs trying to put the toothpaste back into the tube with its âiâ series of devices and ecosystems is truly stunning, if you take a step back and look at the bigger picture.

But for all thatâs happening, I think it is Wozniakâs spirit that will prevail, for once having tasted freedom, itâs pretty hard for people to go the other way.

I have no question that this will be tested in court. I don't think there has ever been a case like this because only Apple could make such a ridiculous attempt to control how developers work. But what is interesting here is that allowing this provision to go to trial may put the entire App Store concept under a legal microscope. Because it seems to me there is a reasonable risk that not only is 3.3.1 restraint of trade, but that the entire "you can only sell apps on iPhones and iPod touches that we approve" thing is found to be restraint of trade. Wouldn't that be tasty.